Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The RIAA Sues 482 More People

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the befriending-the-youth dept.

The Courts 535

An anonymous reader writes "Today the RIAA said they have sued another group of people, 482 to be exact, for copyright infringement. The RIAA used their 'John Doe' litigation process in this round of law suits, because they do not know the names of the copyright infringers. After appeals court ruled that Verizon does not have to provide names of customers to the RIAA, the RIAA started using the 'John Doe' litigation process." (Similar stories at Wired News and CoolTechZone).

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And at the top of the list is (0, Offtopic)

Proctal Relapse (467579) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501665)

CLIT

How long will this go on? (5, Insightful)

MacGoldstein (619138) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501670)

I wonder when they'll ever figure out that suing your consumers is not an effective business model?

Re:How long will this go on? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501722)

letting everyone take their product for free is though right?

Re:How long will this go on? (5, Interesting)

KrisHolland (660643) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501800)

"letting everyone take their product for free is though right?"

These companies likely would lose very little money to begin with because A) they would have rented it from the library B) they would have bought it used C) they would have borrowed it from a friend.

People who have time to dick around for hours looking for music online is the type of people who have little money (other wise they would have worked a fraction of that time and bought the music instead).

Re:How long will this go on? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501758)

you are not a consumer if you are offering others files for free.

Re:How long will this go on? (5, Funny)

lightspawn (155347) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501766)

I wonder when they'll ever figure out that suing your consumers is not an effective business model?

When SCO files for bankruptcy.

Re:How long will this go on? (2, Insightful)

mr_jim83 (753759) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501893)

SCO isn't suing its consumers. It's suing companies that use a competing product that they claim infringes on their property.

The parent shouldn't be modded insightful, just offtopic. I could see modding it funny maybe, but insightful? Not really.

Re:How long will this go on? (2, Funny)

lightspawn (155347) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501956)

Sco is too suing it's customers. Autozone, Daimer Chrysler, who knows who's next.

The parent was supposed to be funny. The only way to get to the music industry is a massive boycott - as in, get 50% of consumers to stop buying music altogether until this nonsense stops. And since CDs are shiny, that's not likely to happen.

Re:How long will this go on? (5, Insightful)

loid_void (740416) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501949)

No, I think the think the question really should be: How can the recording industry be so stupid as to be represented by an association that by it's very actions drives it's customers away. Oh yea I forgot, the industry choose them. Then they deserve to die the slow death that they have chosen.

Re:How long will this go on? (5, Insightful)

dasmegabyte (267018) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501983)

When people stop buying CDs from RIAA artists. Which, after close to three years of this nonsense, they haven't. In fact, according to SoundScan, OTC sales are actually up.

So I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that suing potential customers IS an effective business model, if you get more money from the suit then you would from their potential sales and if other customers want your product so much they're willing to buy from you even as you screw them. And seeing as how they're settling for $3k+ from filesharers who aren't likely to be buying 160+ cds any time soon, it looks like this is going to be just another line item in the budget. $5,000,000 from price fixed cd sales here, $2,000,000 from recouped advances, and another mil or so from suing grandmothers and preteen girls. Very effective; and you don't even have to call a sleazy accountant to do the books.

I'll sue if you don't get first post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501671)

you fuckers

Yay! (4, Funny)

mekkab (133181) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501674)

Lets get those pirates who are stealing Britney Spear's music!

Maybe we can SUE good taste into them...

This is not funny. (0)

mekkab (133181) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501751)

all you Norah Jones fans are NEXT!

Re:This is not funny. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501929)

good, i can't stand norah jones either. get rid of 'em all.

Re:Yay! (5, Funny)

fwitness (195565) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501908)

I feel like Britney is stealing from me every time I hear her songs on the radio. It's like my soul is just a little smaller.

Then I see videos of her practicing in sweats. Alright, we're even.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501675)

sue my ass bitches

Sir, I represent the Law Firm of YOU FAIL IT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501729)

[n/t]

That stinks... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501680)

Ouch... would hate to be one of those 482.

Overall total? (5, Interesting)

BrickM (178032) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501682)

Does anyone know the number of people the RIAA has sued thus far? I'd be interested in a comparision between that number and the number of estimated pirates (the more accurate numbers, and the RIAA's numbers). I'm wondering if all of this litigation is a financially sound strategy for the RIAA.

1595 (0)

mekkab (133181) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501716)

According to here [nwfusion.com] the total is 1595.

How many settled out of court, like, 1300+?!?!

Re:1595 (2, Insightful)

BrickM (178032) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501768)

That's amazing. 1600 sued, out of the millions pirating. Most of those sued settled out of court. It'd be interesting to know what the settlement was, because I doubt the RIAA is getting enough from these "John Doe" pirates to cover their lawyer costs. That makes this even more of a blatant scare tactic than I originally thought. Thanks for the link.

Wrong! 3429!!! (1)

mekkab (133181) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501783)

Sorry- I was a little too fast with the Google.

Re:Overall total? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501718)

does anyone know the number of people the RIAA has sued

Not enough.

Re:Overall total? (4, Informative)

mOoZik (698544) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501737)

The total thus far is 3,429 [wired.com] . As for the number of pirates, it is in the millions and millions, for sure.

Re:Overall total? (5, Insightful)

BrickM (178032) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501797)

So according to Wired's total (and their settlement estimate), the RIAA is looking at $10,500,000. That's pretty impressive for a bunch of copy-n-paste lawsuits. Any lawyers want to estimate the RIAA's legal costs for this campaign?

Re:Overall total? (4, Insightful)

sysopd (617656) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501920)

As for the number of pirates, it is in the millions and millions, for sure.

And as for the number of good Artists, hundreds? Seriously, I am willing to bet that most people who have 50GB of mp3s have less than 1GB of music they really even remotely like. You have to sift through piles and piles of pure crap to find the gems.

So any figures I see about the amount of $$ someone has 'stolen' by downloading gigabytes of music I have to reject because they would never buy all that crap and if they had to, they would have given up long ago without finding anything they like. I for one have bought way too much music ever since I started downloading it. If its good I buy it. I have close to 1000 cds and over 100 vinyl.

Think about it, how much of your collection is something you'd buy or already own and how much is refuse you have collected and somehow can't delete? How many people have binders full of software they never use, music they don't like, and movies/tv shows they haven't watched or don't like? I know several.

Re:Overall total? (3, Informative)

shadow099 (685953) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501744)

Cool Tech Zone says 3,429 total users..

Re:Overall total? (1)

MacGoldstein (619138) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501985)

Better yet, does anyone know anyone the RIAA has actually sued? I'd love to hear from someone who has had to go through this first hand.

I currently have no pirated music of any sort on my machine, but have had in the past. Those who continue to do this are probably going to eventually get caught, and I'm curious to see how many of them who were careless enough to get caught actually frequent Slashdot.

Just my 2 cents

Poor John Doe (5, Funny)

neon-fx (777448) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501698)

I feel sorry for this John Doe character, he's always getting picked on.

Re:Poor John Doe (3, Funny)

suckmysav (763172) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501958)

I feel sorry for this John Doe character, he's always getting picked on.

Yep, him and Bill Posters are constantly being harrassed.

Ridiculous (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501713)

When are they going to understand that by suing people you just have the opposite effect.

Re:Ridiculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501752)

what, you mean people won't buy their music now?

that's why they're suing them in the first place.

We always here about initiating the suits..... (5, Interesting)

wo1verin3 (473094) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501719)

.... but unless it's an odd case like a 93 year old grandmother we don't here much about the outcome. While I'm sure some have come to settlement, where are the other thousands of cases? Have ANY of them gone to trial?

Re:We always here about initiating the suits..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501813)

They know darn well it costs way too much to litigate, so they settle for mere pennies on the dollar, probably in the range of 3-4 grand per suit.

If anyone is interested, check out [boycott-riaa.com] for some viewpoints on the matter.

Re:We always here about initiating the suits..... (4, Informative)

Erwos (553607) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501848)

The fact that you're not hearing much about the outcomes is primarily linked to the fact that settlements typically include gag clauses to prevent you from coming out and berating the RIAA.

You can probably infer from the fact that we've not heard much that 99.9% of the cases have been settled privately.

I'm not usually a guy to whine about spelling, but it's "hear", not "here". If you want people to take you seriously, spelling is important.

-Erwos

Joe Doe process (0, Redundant)

chamblah (774997) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501721)

Can some one explain to me what that is?

Re:Joe Doe process (3, Insightful)

nelsonal (549144) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501782)

First I'm not a lawyer, this is merely what I've gleaned from other articles on the subject. AFAIK, the RIAA or their agents collects the IP address of people sharing (large?) amounts of music on various (Fasttrack & Limewire?) p2p networks. They then sue "John Doe" (the legal term for anonymous coward) and supena the owner of the IP address at the time of the incident. Once the name and address are in hand the copyright holder or their agent begins a formal lawsuit (and usually tries to settle out of court for an apology, cash (3k-10k), and an agreement not to share music. The threat is the huge penalties if you are convicted of copyright violation for each song you were sharing.

RIAA faq. (4, Informative)

RobertTaylor (444958) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501723)

"the RIAA started using the 'John Doe' litigation process"

For those wanting to know more about 'John Doe' processes etc here is the RIAA's FAQ [riaa.com] .

Re:RIAA faq. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501818)

For those wanting more FUD here is the RIAA's FAQ. For everyone else here [chillingeffects.org] is the FAQ from ChillingEffects.org.

Re:RIAA faq. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501860)

"When we come across a user who is distributing copyrighted music files, we download copyrighted music files (of our member companies) the user is offering, as well as document the date and time that we downloaded those files."

Isn't this illegal? Someone over at the RIAA is in a lot of trouble.

Don't sue me (0)

leakingmemory (750252) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501735)

Well, they're not suing me at lest..
Oh wait...

Sue Happy (4, Insightful)

Osgyth (790644) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501739)

I don't know about anyone else, but these "sue to scare" tactics just don't worry me. They have failed to change my computing in anyway. I still download music; in fact, I may download more, just to site them. IMHO I feel they are just alienating more people with each lawsuit.

Uploading is the key issue... (5, Insightful)

Brandon Glass (790653) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501844)

I wonder why more people don't realize this, the RIAA are actually balancing on the edge of a knife with this one: They want to stop copyright infringement, but they don't want to draw too much attention to the copyright infringement via P2P issue, because they realize that if too many people start paying attention to it, the masses will realize what the law actually says regarding this.

Downloading isn't the key issue, uploading is. Copyright infringement is traditionally defined by unauthorized distribution - so they really only have the right to go after those who are illegally distributing their content. This means the uploaders. Depending on your P2P client, it is possible to prevent uploading, or at least stop uploading by removing the file from the P2P system as soon as it's downloaded - of course, in some cases this will render individual P2P networks unusable if too many people do it, but some, like Emule/Edonkey, have the ability to upload while downloading... so unless they catch the culprits very quickly, removing the files from the shared directory and thus preventing further uploading will take all of a few minutes, and no charges can (theoretically) be pressed.

Re:Uploading is the key issue... (0)

Osgyth (790644) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501950)

You're right; downloading the music isn't the problem. Keeping it is.

You are allowed to download any mp3 that you want, hell download them all. But if you don't legally own media (i.e. cd, tape, vinyl) you are "supposed" to delete them in 24 hrs.

Of course you can prevent uploading, if fact I do, but if everyone does; there won't be any more P2P suckers to leach off of. ;)

Re:Uploading is the key issue... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501965)

eh, the 24 hrs thing is a myth.

name me the law where it states that you can delete the item in 24 hrs and still be legal.

Re:Sue Happy (5, Insightful)

loid_void (740416) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501990)

Exactly, and just like Prohibition, no one stopped drinking, everyone just got a little more careful.

Where did John Doe come from anyway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501742)

Come on, shouldn't it be "John Stag", at least?

And the RIAA's site... (4, Funny)

Tuxedo Jack (648130) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501745)

Hasn't got jack about the new lawsuits. Can anyone get a list of what IPs are being sued?

And in lesser news, thank god for dynamic IP addresses...

Re:And the RIAA's site... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501810)

you can thank god all you want, but you best pray to me that log files are dumped frequently and often ;)

Re:And the RIAA's site... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501816)

And in lesser news, thank god for dynamic IP addresses...

you actually think that'd keep you safe? i can't speak for any other ISP, but the Comcast service in my area uses dynamic IP addresses, and ties the MAC address of whatever's connected to the cable modem to your customer name/etc. guess what shows up in DHCP logs?

Re:And the RIAA's site... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501822)

As if your connection wasn't logged in the first place..

The only advantage of dynamic addressing I can think of is the fact that you can't be "DoSed" to death. :-)

Re:And the RIAA's site... (1)

Gandalfar (599790) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501824)

And in lesser news, thank god for dynamic IP addresses...


Why should this help? ISP knows from their logs which user had that IP at the time. Dynamic IPs just make it harder for people that are being sued to know if they were the ones with that IP at that time and if they should prepare for anything evil coming their way.

Re:And the RIAA's site... (2, Insightful)

SB5 (165464) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501878)

Nope, not the case. Any smart ISP would dump the logs after a set amount of time. 1 month to 2 weeks. There is no real need to keep them longer... Unless you want to help to prosecute your customers... Which might not sit well with your customer base...

Re:And the RIAA's site... (1)

swv3752 (187722) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501957)

Plus it is easy to bring up doubt about the correct identity of any given dynnamic IP. My IP changes every day, and that with me sitting on a router.

I expect to hear of at least one person wrongfully accused, just because of the dynamic IP's.

I think they mean "alleged copyright infringement" (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501747)

What if you already own the CD? Isn't that just fair use?

Before anyone jumps on this and says it's stupid - I recently downloaded a whole bunch of songs to which I had the CDs. Why? Because my CD drive and my secondary hard drive (which housed all my MP3s) both recently went tits up. I blame a bad drive cable. Anyway, my gf was leaving town for a month and I was in the process of putting together a 'mix tape' on a portable mp3 player for her. Since she was leaving soon I didn't have time to run out to the store and buy and install a bunch of new equipment - but I could leave my p2p software running overnight.

Uncommon? Sure. But that alone doesn't make it illegal.

Re:I think they mean "alleged copyright infringeme (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501819)

It's stupid, and you're a stupid troll.

They aren't suing downloaders. They're suing uploaders. If you download the tracks and then your software automatically shares them and you upload them to someone else, it's not fair use.

But then, I'm sure you already knew that.

Re:I think they mean "alleged copyright infringeme (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501921)

And your an Ass hole...

But then, I'm sure you already knew that.

Re:I think they mean "alleged copyright infringeme (4, Interesting)

Sancho (17056) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501974)

It's highly unlikely that they're suing downloaders anyway. I believe everyone thus far sued have been sharing files. The media just latches on to "downloading music" for some reason--either as scare tactics, pressure from the RIAA to spin it this way, whatever. And really, it makes sense. Unless the RIAA were hosting files and tracking the IP of people who downloaded them (a shady practice to say the least) they've got no way of knowing who's downloading something. All they can really do is scan the P2P network and see who's offering, get the IP, and sue.

Now it's still alleged if they didn't actually check every file to make sure that it's actually music instead of crap, viruses, etc. But I suspect that unless you re-shared those files that you downloaded, you won't have any need to fear getting sued over your download.

As ALWAYS.....It's been said before..... (5, Funny)

Valiss (463641) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501750)

"We keep losing customers! I don't understand! We sue the fuckers, and they still won't buy our products!"

Re:As ALWAYS.....It's been said before..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501781)

no, they're suing because people aren't buying their products. the piracy started first, not the other way around.

Re:As ALWAYS.....It's been said before..... (2, Funny)

pr0c (604875) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501864)

It worked for SCO! Err... wait

John Doe Litigation... (2, Interesting)

anakin357 (69114) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501757)

So basically they file lawsuits with as "RIAA vs J. Doe" and then subpena the information from Verizon and then the ISP is required to release the information or be held liable by the court.

Just a quick link I found, pretty informative. http://www.mttlr.org/voleight/RederOBrienver5TYPE_ HTML.htm [mttlr.org]

Re:John Doe Litigation... (2, Interesting)

Ubergrendle (531719) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501821)

This is where I hope ISPs clue into who THEIR customers are.

The legal process is *notoriously* slow. Hopefully the ISPs rotate their DHCP logs faster than they can receive/action the supoena...(nudge nudge, wink wink).

See y'all later (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501770)

Hi
I'm not in the office at the moment. This email has been forwarded to my secretary.

I'll be back from the Bahamas ... sometime.

J. Doe.

John Doe Payment Process (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501777)

I wanna pay for all my downloads retroactively, but I can't remember everything I downloaded. Can I, like, pay anonymous unknown parties for it?

Why does this continue to be reported? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501785)

I think we have established by now that the RIAA does not really like people stealing their products, and are willing to take thieves to court over it.

Does slashdot report on every Joe Burglar arrested? No. So why should we have to suffer through another article like this one everytime the RIAA tries to stop people stealing their music?

Feeling lazy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501840)

[insert whining about how information wants to be free, i dont like their business model so that makes stealing (and yes, it IS stealing.) ok, whatever the bullshit excuse of the day happens to be]

Re:Why does this continue to be reported? (1)

needacoolnickname (716083) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501890)

Have they actually taken people to court? We know they don't like people giving away their music, but have they actually gone to court? I read a lot about how they threaten to go to court and offer a way to get out of this ($$$$$$$), but haven't read about a court case involving the RIAA and a person they are accusing of stealing their music (civil or criminal) that has even gotten to the point to of getting into a courtroom to be negotiated or plead out. Until they set a precedent by actually showing their faces in a courtroom I think it's extortion to keep a sinking business plan afloat rather than change business plans. But that's just me, a silly consumer rather than a big company with scary people in suits who can get their lawyer to type up threatening letters on legal sized paper.

Location of those sued? (1)

BiggRanger (787488) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501811)

I'm guessing that the RIAA is only trying to sue IP address that are in the US, since the long grabby hand of the RIAA can't reach across borders. So that means everybody outside the US and any other country that has RIAA type SS stormtroopers is safe.

Have they ALL settled? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501812)

We keep hearing about another round being sued... But (and I may be wrong) I have yet to hear of a case that's gone to court. Have all of them settled? Has anyone said "fuck you" and torn the lawsuit up? (I would imagine if you're targeting college students, SOMEONE must be idealistic enough to tell them to get lost...)

The number of lawsuits must be in the thousands by now. I really have a hard time believing all of them paid the RIAA settlement... Is it possible the RIAA downplays or lets go the suits when the defendant doesn't play ball? After all, all it would take is for one case to go to court, and for them to lose, to ruin this whole strategy.

Re:Have they ALL settled? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501931)

http://www.suedbytheriaa.com/

Re:Have they ALL settled? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501951)

Maybe that's the reason for all the John Doe suits...

Damn I need a subject (4, Interesting)

SB5 (165464) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501814)

3 years ago the economy went to shit...

3 years ago CD sales went down....

Think that's a coincidence.

Also CD sales don't count as much since we got the legal downloading music DRM bullshit now... You have to count those eggs too....

Re:Damn I need a subject (5, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501936)

3 years ago the economy went to shit...

3 years ago CD sales went down....

Think that's a coincidence.


Didn't we tell you that piracy would destroy the economy?

KFG

Re:Damn I need a subject (1)

SB5 (165464) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501993)

Yeah, I know... I should have bought more CDs...

Anyhow, I should try and clear what I was saying. The RIAA excuse is they are sueing because nobody is buying music. They claim this by showing CD sales going down for 3 years or something like this... Even though the economy has been declining for a little longer than 3 years...

More info, please (5, Insightful)

cove209 (681558) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501825)

I have two questions regarding this: 1- The RIAA is filing "John Doe" lawsuits (they will add the names later after the discovery process or warrants are served or whatever). At this time, they are trying to use the ip addresses to establish the identity of the people they are suing. How come the ip addresses are not posted in the news stories or on the eff page if it is public information and is in the lawsuit? 2- Exactly how is the RIAA obtaining their information? Are they seeding songs with data in the tag so they can then say in court that this song was slightly modified and now has a unique filesize or date in the tag and we alone have put this song out there and let people download it? And if so, can they legally do that? They are not a law enforcement agency, can they say that the laws regarding copyright don't apply to us since we own the copyright? OK, more than 2 questions: 3- Exactly what applications are the people using when they download this stuff? Kaaza? If it is Kaaza, are they then looking int he default shared Kaaza folder for the song they have seeded? I have found NO websites that have this info. Any thoughts?

Re:More info, please (1)

Anonymous Cowpat (788193) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501916)

And if so, can they legally do that? They are not a law enforcement agency, can they say that the laws regarding copyright don't apply to us since we own the copyright?

IANAL OAEVRAL(Or Anything Even Vaguely Resembling A Lawyer)

Well, since they're somewhat chummy with the artists, they could allow the RIAA the rights to copy the music for that purpose.

The problem with the 'data in the file' is that it COULD appear from other sources (although as they are civil cases, they don't need 'all reasonable doubt') but all it should take is someone to distribute a programme to add the tag to legitimate files, and now the RIAA doesn't have a case because the tag is no longer unqiue.

Still a null percentage (1)

artlu (265391) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501827)

Does anyone know the cumulative total of all the RIAA lawsuits? These are just being instantiated in order to scare the general populus into thinking they get sued. Sure, go download music as much as you want but if you share it you get sued. It is definitely a one way street.

What I don't understand is that I can have an archive of music on a network and someone can "break in" and steal that music from me and then I can get sued by the RIAA. Where is the logic in that!

Bah Humbug,
Aj

GroupShares Inc. [groupshares.com] - A Free and Interactive Stock Market Trading Community - Still a startup so check it out please.

Anonymous P2P (4, Informative)

KrisHolland (660643) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501829)

Anonymous P2P will likely 'solve' these lawsuits, the technology is coming along nicely.

I think that I2P [i2p.net] and Mute [sourceforge.net] need some developers though if you are interested.

Pirates & Parrots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501831)

Sounds like a new genre of computer game.

List of usernames? (1)

sysopd (617656) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501832)

Does anyone have a list of the usernames/handles that are being sued?

There have been lists of the usernames before but I can't find one for this round of lawsuits.

Prohibition (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501842)

Obviously these guys don't read their history books. They're just going to create a black market that they won't be able to control. And I'll figure out how to make money out of it...

Judgement in favour of the plaintiff. (4, Funny)

digitaltraveller (167469) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501845)

Judge:

Bailiff, remand Mr. Doe into custody. Mr. Doe, how do you plead?

Bailiff:

Judge, the defendant has failed to appear.

Judge:

Issue an arrest warrant in Mr. Doe's name.
Case dismissed.

RIAA:

Doh!

Countersue under Article 19 of the UDHR. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501867)

As far as I'm concerned, 19 trumps any copyright law.

"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."


Songs are information. They may be sought, received and imparted as I see fit. I'll take the buggers to the World Court if they fuck with me.

RIAA insurance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501872)

1. Buy a WAP.

2. Install it with no encryption, MAC filtering, etc.

3. "Who, little ole me?"

safe (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501875)

is to being safe this time, fortunate

Future RIAA news (3, Interesting)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501887)

I can't say this isn't stuff that matters, as it matters a great deal to some of us, but it looks like stories like this will be posted every couple of months for the forseeable future.
That being the case, I'd like to see the post itself contain some distinguishing marks, like a mention of what round in the series this is, or a comment on overall trends. This is the 4th round of these suits, right? (or is it the 5th?)
I know, people should read the article, and google for basic questions, and all that. However, this subject is becoming almost like SCO. There are just so many repetitious elements that it is extra easy to lose sight of the bigger picture.
Also, we can't expect the other media to convert data to knowledge. I doubt most press releases on this are going to keep track of whether the numbers per round have increased, decreased, or fluctuated both ways, for example. As another example, would you want to rely on Wired to tell you whether these clusters of suits start comeing closer together? (That's not to criticise Wired in particular, but to say that the press tends to become complacent the umpty-umpth time they are covering what sounds like the same story.).

Read Closely (4, Funny)

RancidLM (723035) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501892)

im sure the Fine print on the letters Read
"ALL YOUR DRUM & BASS ARE BELONG TO US"

Don't call us pirates -- (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501894)

We prefer copyright challenged.

About time (3, Insightful)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501899)

As much as i hate the idea of RIAA and MPAA sueing fileswappers, at least now they have to show a little merrit in the case before they can automajicaly get the realname and personal information of the accused. I think this is a giant step forward in corecting some flaws in the DMCA that allowed anyone to get personal information about anyone else if they insinuate that they have violated thier copyrights.

To me finding that RIAA has to now get some aproval (form a court) before getting the infromation they are seeking is the true news worthy potion of this article. I think most people havn't really had problems with RIAA and the likes going after people breaking the copyright laws, thier problems was with the way they went about doing it. Some will always have issues with others trying to protect thier investments and there will be some that still don't like the lawsuite/extortion ways RIAA is doing it. As i see it now one down and more to go.

Thier extortion tactics, whiel can be viewed with good intentions leaves alot of problems open to come back and haunt people. Maybe there should be a test to what how they actually gather evidence and how that evidence is displayed.. also it would be nice if all the lawsuites could be lumped into some class action deal were people could share the cost of actually defending themselves from it.

enough already (0, Offtopic)

stephentyrone (664894) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501904)

will someone please patent the " 'John Doe' litigation process" as a business model, then sue the RIAA for infringement? please?

Yuo F9a1l It (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501923)

disgust, or 3Een

This is getting ridiculous (1)

Ignorant Aardvark (632408) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501925)

I'm not trying to be funny here ... but at what point will it be until they sue 127.0.0.1? They've been suing everyone thus far, at which point will they have sued so many people that people simply won't put up with it anymore?

EFF (0, Troll)

GNAA_HoppingGoblin (790658) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501926)

EFF where are you

googlebomb anyone? (4, Funny)

GoNINzo (32266) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501937)

Anyone want to join a googlebomb of mine? I'm doing bunch of pricks [riaa.com] for the RIAA. Anyone want to join me?

Put this on a webpage: what a <a href="http://www.riaa.com/">bunch of pricks</a>

If ya think about it.... (2)

vonsneerderhooten (254776) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501939)

these lawsuits do nothing more than publicize the fact that you can download music illegally from the internet. It's kinda funny in an ironic way.

That said, Live, Legal P2P [furthurnet.org] and Live, Legal Bittorrent Downloads [etree.org] .

Leave it alone, see how they like ZERO sales (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501963)

It's simple. Don't share RIAA music. Stop sharing and buying. Music is a luxury, wonder how long it would take to bring those idjits down if sales fell right off the cliff for a few months.

Easy for me to say, though, I have loads of CDs, tapes and LPs of my favorite music, already bought and paid for. I could listen to my collection for a long time before I got really tired of it. Got a lot of MP3 compilations, from music I own.

One advantage of classic rock, I guess.

Speaking of anti-dmca... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9501968)

I'd love to see one of these [ninjagear.net] stuck on the bumper of Jack V.'s Jaguar.

Oh, and for more anti-dmca fun, don't forget anti-dmca.org [anti-dmca.org] for all of your fun "Where's my rights?" headlines.

"We are the RIAA... (1)

TheCyko1 (568452) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501984)

We don't know who you are or anyhting about you, but we know you did something. Now pay us."

Must be a slow day for SCO (1)

BiggRanger (787488) | more than 10 years ago | (#9501989)

Now if only someone would setup a P2P server with 100 gig of songs and plug it into SCO's network for the RIAA to find... RIAA sues SCO for copyright infinement, SCO counter sues for copyright infringement because they think RIAA is using Linux. --- Just throwing a little gas on the fire!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?